The Lord's thoughts on homosexual relationships.
 

As I was preparing my lesson this week, which covered 3rd Nephi 12-15 where the sermon on the mount is re-taught I was struck by this comparison:

Matthew 5:

27 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:
28 But I say unto you, That whosoever alooketh on a bwoman to clust after her hath committed dadultery with her already in his heart.
29 And if thy right eye aoffend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into bhell.
30 And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

Compare now to 3rd Nephi 12:

27 Behold, it is written by them of old time, that thou shalt not commit adultery;
28 But I say unto you, that whosoever looketh on a woman, to lust after her, hath committed adultery already in his heart.
29 Behold, I give unto you a commandment, that ye suffer anone of these things to enter into your heart;
30 For it is better that ye should deny yourselves of these things, wherein ye will take up your across, than that ye should be cast into hell.

Note the bold portion does not appear in Matthew. Speaking now specifically of sexual sin the Savior invites us to deny ourselves these things and "take up your cross" which is a very interesting choice of analogy considering his very, very recent experience carrying his own cross and then dying on it.

So extrapolating to homosexuality two principles seem clear to me, and this is what I taught my class. The first is that there are things our "flesh" may want to do. Things it wants to do so powerfully we don't think we can be happy if we don't. Jesus compares these desires to carrying a cross which, again, is an incredible analogy when you ponder it. He is saying that he knows how hard it is, in fact, that it is one of the hardest things. Still, his message, notwithstanding all of that, is that is better to bear a cross than miss out on eternal life.

Second, and the bigger message I assume for most of us, is how a disciple of Christ should react to one who bears a cross. The temptation is always to be focused on the judgmental "justice" aspect of the question rather than the "mercy" aspect of it. Many will be callous and say "this person can choose their own actions, so suck it up or suffer the consequences of the law." As Jesus carried his cross to Golgotha and stumbled under its weight there were many who did just that. They assumed that the law was exacting its price and felt little sympathy for the man who carried the cross. And yet others stepped out of the crowd, notwithstanding they must have been ridiculed for doing so and helped Jesus carry that cross. So then, a disciple of Christ does not look upon one faced with such a terrible burden (regardless of what they choose), shrug his shoulders, and indifferently believe the law will exact its price. The Christian steps out of the crowd and offers to help carry the burden.

While the law is and can be harsh, and certainly it seems very harsh to me for people who have same sex attraction, the Christian should never be harsh but should be the first to try and help shoulder the burden rather than being the first to haughtily condemn and then watch with satisfaction as a person struggles with the consequences of either of the unattractive choices they are faced with. Nothing should cause us to withdraw the hand of fellowship or cease to put our arm around our brothers and sisters, particularly when they suffer a burden that is so terrible to be borne. This is the message for the church and the membership today, I believe, that we must make every effort to love and embrace gays and not just keep our distance.

I don't believe that our doctrine can ever embrace homosexual relationships, and perhaps gays will never be comfortable in our chapels. Still, I am certain that we as Christians can embrace them and engage them respectfully and with love and the fact that it make so many of us uncomfortable underscores that we need to do it.

Agreed.
 

And they should not be the demographic that defines what marriage is.

Very nice.

Very good points and a nice reading of the teaching.

I don't consider all those who favor Prop 8 anti-gay, although I'm sure there are a fair number of homophobes in their number. What I'm considered about the Church's stance on this is that it seemingly justifies those who do hate gay people in their hatred. I know that the Church doesn't intend this message, and these people will never claim to "hate" gay people, per se, but they feel completely justified in their opinion that gays are weird/freaks/perverts/etc and they therefore have no obligation to examine and overcome their feelings of discomfort around them.

UtahDan, that is an interesting take on that scripture. I had never thought of it that way. It is nice to hear something new on this topic, regardless of which "side" it represents.

It seems to me that passage pertains specifically to adultery.

To me it is not a valid comparison to liken the "burden" of abstaining from adultery with the burden of a gay person living completely alone (both emotionally and sexually) for his entire life.

I know you don't mean it this way, but a lot of people say, "We treat all people, whether gay or straight, exactly the same. Nobody is allowed to have sex unless they are married to that person. So everybody plays by the same rules."

That position is an obvious fallacy and displays a complete lack of empathy and understanding of what gay people must go through.

Being a single guy myself and being told to abstain from the fruits of the female loins,,,forgive me if I don't have a lot of empathy nor understanding for a gay man who is also told he has to abstain from having sex with another man.

There is a significant difference. All you would have to do is get married and you would be permitted to have sex. A gay person doesn't have this same hope. They must never be in a relationship nor have sex. I'm sure abstaining is hard for you, but it's most likely temporary.

They can still get married or at the very least be recognized as a domestic partner in some kind of registry in many states or cities. Even SLC has a domestic partner registry now where they can file for this, so they can receive the same benefits their partner is getting.

Sorry, but the "I can get married and they can't" excuse doesn't wash. While I understand it from the Church's Spiritual viewpoint of "I can still get married and they can't"....still you're not gonna find any single males who're feeling sorry for a gay single male because they can't get any lovin.

I wonder if young gay Mormons dry hump like their straight counterparts.